stable.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: reinette.chatre@intel.com, alexander.levin@verizon.com,
	fenghua.yu@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	tony.luck@intel.com, vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 09:01:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1513324916185202@kroah.com> (raw)


This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount

to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     x86-intel_rdt-fix-potential-deadlock-during-resctrl-unmount.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From foo@baz Tue Dec 12 10:32:42 CET 2017
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 02:16:58 -0700
Subject: x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount

From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>


[ Upstream commit 36b6f9fcb8928c06b6638a4cf91bc9d69bb49aa2 ]

Lockdep warns about a potential deadlock:

[   66.782842] ======================================================
[   66.782888] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[   66.782937] 4.14.0-rc2-test-test+ #48 Not tainted
[   66.782983] ------------------------------------------------------
[   66.783052] umount/336 is trying to acquire lock:
[   66.783117]  (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff81032395>] rdt_kill_sb+0x215/0x390
[   66.783193]
               but task is already holding lock:
[   66.783244]  (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810321b6>] rdt_kill_sb+0x36/0x390
[   66.783305]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[   66.783364]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[   66.783419]
               -> #3 (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}:
[   66.783467]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.783509]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.783543]        __mutex_lock+0x71/0x9b0
[   66.783575]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[   66.783610]        intel_rdt_online_cpu+0x3b/0x430
[   66.783649]        cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xab/0x8e0
[   66.783687]        cpuhp_thread_fun+0x7a/0x150
[   66.783722]        smpboot_thread_fn+0x1cc/0x270
[   66.783764]        kthread+0x16e/0x190
[   66.783794]        ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
[   66.783825]
               -> #2 (cpuhp_state){+.+.}:
[   66.783870]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.783906]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.783938]        cpuhp_issue_call+0x102/0x170
[   66.783974]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x154/0x2a0
[   66.784023]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xc7/0x170
[   66.784061]        page_writeback_init+0x43/0x67
[   66.784097]        pagecache_init+0x43/0x4a
[   66.784131]        start_kernel+0x3ad/0x3f7
[   66.784165]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[   66.784204]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[   66.784241]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[   66.784270]
               -> #1 (cpuhp_state_mutex){+.+.}:
[   66.784319]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.784355]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.784387]        __mutex_lock+0x71/0x9b0
[   66.784419]        mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[   66.784454]        __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x52/0x2a0
[   66.784497]        __cpuhp_setup_state+0xc7/0x170
[   66.784535]        page_alloc_init+0x28/0x30
[   66.784569]        start_kernel+0x148/0x3f7
[   66.784602]        x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[   66.784642]        x86_64_start_kernel+0x72/0x75
[   66.784678]        verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[   66.784707]
               -> #0 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
[   66.784759]        check_prev_add+0x32f/0x6e0
[   66.784794]        __lock_acquire+0x1293/0x13f0
[   66.784830]        lock_acquire+0xaf/0x220
[   66.784863]        cpus_read_lock+0x3d/0xb0
[   66.784896]        rdt_kill_sb+0x215/0x390
[   66.784930]        deactivate_locked_super+0x3e/0x70
[   66.784968]        deactivate_super+0x40/0x60
[   66.785003]        cleanup_mnt+0x3f/0x80
[   66.785034]        __cleanup_mnt+0x12/0x20
[   66.785070]        task_work_run+0x8b/0xc0
[   66.785103]        exit_to_usermode_loop+0x94/0xa0
[   66.786804]        syscall_return_slowpath+0xe8/0x150
[   66.788502]        entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0xab/0xad
[   66.790194]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[   66.795139] Chain exists of:
                 cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem --> cpuhp_state --> rdtgroup_mutex

[   66.800035]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[   66.803267]        CPU0                    CPU1
[   66.804867]        ----                    ----
[   66.806443]   lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[   66.808002]                                lock(cpuhp_state);
[   66.809565]                                lock(rdtgroup_mutex);
[   66.811110]   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
[   66.812608]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

[   66.816983] 2 locks held by umount/336:
[   66.818418]  #0:  (&type->s_umount_key#35){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81229738>] deactivate_super+0x38/0x60
[   66.819922]  #1:  (rdtgroup_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810321b6>] rdt_kill_sb+0x36/0x390

When the resctrl filesystem is unmounted the locks should be obtain in the
locks in the same order as was done when the cpus came online:

      cpu_hotplug_lock before rdtgroup_mutex.

This also requires to switch the static_branch_disable() calls to the
_cpulocked variant because now cpu hotplug lock is held already.

[ tglx: Switched to cpus_read_[un]lock ]

Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>
Acked-by: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Acked-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/cc292e76be073f7260604651711c47b09fd0dc81.1508490116.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@verizon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c |   10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c
@@ -1297,9 +1297,7 @@ static void rmdir_all_sub(void)
 		kfree(rdtgrp);
 	}
 	/* Notify online CPUs to update per cpu storage and PQR_ASSOC MSR */
-	get_online_cpus();
 	update_closid_rmid(cpu_online_mask, &rdtgroup_default);
-	put_online_cpus();
 
 	kernfs_remove(kn_info);
 	kernfs_remove(kn_mongrp);
@@ -1310,6 +1308,7 @@ static void rdt_kill_sb(struct super_blo
 {
 	struct rdt_resource *r;
 
+	cpus_read_lock();
 	mutex_lock(&rdtgroup_mutex);
 
 	/*Put everything back to default values. */
@@ -1317,11 +1316,12 @@ static void rdt_kill_sb(struct super_blo
 		reset_all_ctrls(r);
 	cdp_disable();
 	rmdir_all_sub();
-	static_branch_disable(&rdt_alloc_enable_key);
-	static_branch_disable(&rdt_mon_enable_key);
-	static_branch_disable(&rdt_enable_key);
+	static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&rdt_alloc_enable_key);
+	static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&rdt_mon_enable_key);
+	static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&rdt_enable_key);
 	kernfs_kill_sb(sb);
 	mutex_unlock(&rdtgroup_mutex);
+	cpus_read_unlock();
 }
 
 static struct file_system_type rdt_fs_type = {


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from reinette.chatre@intel.com are

queue-4.14/x86-intel_rdt-fix-potential-deadlock-during-resctrl-unmount.patch

             reply	other threads:[~2017-12-15  8:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-15  8:01 gregkh [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-12-12 10:11 Patch "x86/intel_rdt: Fix potential deadlock during resctrl unmount" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree gregkh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1513324916185202@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=alexander.levin@verizon.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
    --cc=sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com \
    --cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).